Human Factors and Ergonomics and the management of existential threats: A work domain analysis of a COVID‐19 return from lockdown restrictions system

Abstract

Following strict “lockdown” restrictions designed to control the spread of the COVID‐19 virus, many jurisdictions are now engaged in a process of easing restrictions in an attempt to stimulate economic and social activity while continuing to suppress virus transmission. This is challenging and complex, and in several regions, new outbreaks have emerged. We argue that systems Human Factors and Ergonomics methods can assist in understanding and optimizing the return from lockdown. To demonstrate, we used work domain analysis to develop an abstraction hierarchy model of a generic “return from lockdown restrictions” system. The model was assessed to identify (a) issues preventing a successful return from lockdown; and (b) leverage points that could be exploited to optimize future processes. The findings show that the aim of continuing to suppress virus transmission conflicts with the aims of returning to pre‐virus economic and social activity levels. As a result, many functions act against each other, ensuring that the system cannot optimally achieve all three of its primary aims. Potential leverage points include modifying the goals and rules of the system and enhancing communications and feedback. Specifically, it is argued that moderating economic aims and modifying how social and community activities are undertaken will result in longer term suppression of the virus.

Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) applications in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned and considerations for methods

“…As demonstrated by the three cases, and aligning with the body of literature describing applications of HFE to support responses to the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., Gurses et al, 2020 ; Salmon et al, 2021 ), HFE can have immense impact and support work and the people working during pandemics. Each case provided a different example of the role HFE can play in health care during a pandemic and how this work can be achieved in a short time.…”

“…One challenge that our field faces is related to the number of available HFE experts in health care organizations and the preparation required by our discipline – in short, we believe our field should grow so that we have a larger number of properly-prepared individuals to participate in and/or lead crisis responses – Salmon et al (2021) suggest potential HFE contributions may be overlooked; we posit that an additional challenge is the size of our profession, in addition to recognition, described in section 5.3 . While we are seeing a growing number of programs focused on HFE at higher education institutions, we hope that the HFE discipline can broaden participation by attracting a diverse group of future experts, perhaps by engaging in outreach to students before entry to a university or college ( Spiwak et al, 2021 ).…”

“…These include the use of face masks, gloves, and other personal protective equipment (PPE) ( Janson et al, 2022 ; Mumma et al, 2022 ; Preece et al, 2021 ), psychological distress in airline pilots as a result of the pandemic ( Alaminos-Torres et al, 2021 ), temperature screening at work ( Goggins et al, 2022 ), physical activities of home-based office workers ( Dillon et al, 2021 ), face-touching behavior during driving ( Ralph et al, 2021 ), effect on travel ( Beh et al, 2021 ), the relevance of distributed situation awareness in light of the pandemic ( Salmon and Plant, 2022 ), access to prehospital emergency health care systems ( Arcuri et al, 2022 ), the necessity of HFE for enhancing work ( de Winter and Hancock, 2021 ) and the impact of HFE on considerations for the field “future of work” ( Bentley et al, 2020 ). In addition, the journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industries published a special issue with seven research articles and two review articles focusing on the HFE response to COVID-19, including the safety and accessibility of public spaces during the pandemic ( Stevens et al, 2021 ), decision-making regarding the reopening of places of worship ( Rothrock et al, 2021 ), the validation of cognitive models in the pandemic context ( Stone et al, 2021 ), anthropometric, environmental, and psychosocial factors affecting distance learning during the pandemic ( Ayyildiz and Taskin Gumus, 2021 ), the optimization of the return from lockdown ( Salmon et al, 2021 ), safety in construction ( Stiles et al, 2021 ) and rail operations ( Naweed et al, 2021 ) during the pandemic, and the impacts of the pandemic on work ( Sigahi et al, 2021 ) and work-life balance ( Gulotta et al, 2021 ).…”

Unveiling the effects of consumers' psychological distance on their reactance and related behavioral outcomes: Do lockdown restrictions matter?

“…The lockdown restrictions varied in different regions but it mainly consists of physical distancing along with personal safety equipment etc. (Salmon et al, 2021 ). The physical distancing is proved to be effective to prevent the virus and the deadly effects of COVID-19, which is implemented with the imposition of lockdown (May, 2020 ).…”

Optimizing Future Advanced BCIs: Using WDA to Identify Potential Pain Points in BCI Systems

“…The findings from this evaluative process can be used to inform system design changes that seek to improve safety and efficiency. To date, the STS-DT prompts have been used to support the in-depth analyses of AH models in areas such as railway level crossing design (Read et al, 2016), pandemic response (Salmon, Stevens et al, 2021), and elite sports clubs (McLean et al, 2021).…”